CHAPTER - ONE

IRANIAN NOBILITY UNDER AKBAR AND JAHANGIR

*

Kc c h­Mukron

,,

A R A 8

£

A N

8 A

,.

.. ' '

... THE MUGHAL EMPIRE

1707

£

Empir• boundary

Suba

Shivoji's kingdom, 1680

Subo capital

B 4

0 F

" G A J Q

, . . \1

II .........

·-.... •' ,.,.

., o:·.:-.. ;:i , ....•• ' · ; ..

l -..,.._ ...

"

. I

,, ,., I

I '.•

CHAPTEH ONE

IRAIUAN NOBILITY IDJDEH AKBAR AND JAIIANGIH

tvle may take the Mugbal nobility to signify the

class of persons who as high officers of the Empire consti-

tuted the higher rungs in the political hierarchy. Tbese

officers comprised both civil bureaucrats and military

commanders. Their personal status was officially fixed

by their ranks (ma~~~bs) granted by the Emperor. By

Aurangzeb 1 s time the term umar~' (plural of ami~, 1comm3nder,

noble') was applied to officers holding man~abs of 1000 ~at 1

and above.

The Mughal nobility was heterogenous in character

as it comprised certain well-recognized racial groups such

as Turanis (Central Asians), Iranis (Persians), Af'gha.ns,

Shaikhzadas (Indian l•luslims), Raj puts and the Dec canis (i.e.

Blj a pur is, Jjaiderabadis and Nara tha s) o Chandra Bhan

Brahman has given an account of this heterogenous character

of the Mughal governing class towards the close of - 2

Shahjahan's reign. Among the foreign observers Bernier

1 M. A thar Ali, The Mughal Nobility Under Aurangzcb, Bombay, 1 966, p:-2(FlereiriaiTer --c"i tea---a.s-Mugl!_a:T l~obili ty ).

2 Guldasta, MS. No. 666/44 Sir Sulaiman Collection, l1aul:3naAzad Library Aligar11, ff. 4(b)-5(a).

(

also speaks of the presence of Uzbeks, Persians, Arabs 1

and Turhs or ttJeir descendants in the Mughal court. He

adds tLat the "Omaras mostly consist of adventurers from 2

<liffercnt na. tions who entice one another to the court. :r

Thus the Hughals had a multi-national, mul ti·-racial

and multi-religious ruling class. Commenting on the

rc;:.m$ab_d.}~-~?- listed in the Aln-i Akbari, Horeland noted that

just under 70 per cent of the nobles whose origin is known

vrere foreigners belonging 11 to families which had eiLner

come to India with Humayilll or had arrived at the court after 3

tbe acce:;sion of Akbar. 11 Amongst foreigners the two elements

- Turanis and Iranis enjoyed a predominant position in

Akbar's nobility. By Turani.s we mean persons coming from

Central Asia, where the Turkish languages were spoken; and

U1e lr~rJs were largely the Persian speaking peoples from

Herat up to Baghdad i.e. the inhabitants of the whole of

the present-day Persia and the Persian-speaking parts of 4

Afchanis tan and (Iraq. We have, however, used the term

1 Francois Bernh~r, ·rravels In Tbe Mughal Empire 16~6-1668, tr. 1~. Constable,second·-ecfition, Dellli 1968, p. 20'9.

2 Ibi~., p. 212.

3 l'I' .• H. lv1oreland, India at tbe Death of Akbar, Delhi (Rep.), 1974, pp. 69.:.7l). -- -

4 lv:Iug~a..l_l~o__!)ili~:y_, op.cit., pp. 18, 19.

3

'Ir~ni nobility' in a precised sense viz. those Ir;nians

wbo !Jad served 1-.ri tb the ~afavid rulers before their migra­

tion to India or the persons coming from the various parts

of the ~afavid empire, including the Kurds, the Circass:!ans

and the TurkmTins.

Since the ruling family was of Turani origin, U1e

Turani notles were initially larger in number. Thus, it

appears that the nobility bequeathed by Humay'Un viaS pre­

dominantly Turani yet with a substantial number of I ranis

Hho had joined his service during his sojourn in Ir'Em and

tJ<3d accompanied him to India. A.bUl Fa~l has given a list of

these nobles, who were 57 in all. Out of these 27 vlere

Turani and 21 Irani; the remaining 9 of them were unidenti-1

fie d. Among the I ranis Bairam Khan, Af~al Khan C:H~.r B~_bslil),

Asl1raf Kh"fm (Mlr Munshi), Jibwaj a Abdul Majid (Di·v/an), Khwaj a

(- -- -- -A taullJh (Diwa_n-i~ _ _Y'u:7.:_uta_!), Mir Sbal1abuddin (Mir Sam~n),

were important nobles as 2

h!lwaJa Abul Qasim and Mir J:Iasan

indica ted by the offices they held. During the regericy of

B:Jiram Knan Iranis as a group maintained tbeir position as

ue is found to lwve promo ted some of ;Jis low ranking: officers

1

2

Afzal Husain, "Growth of Irani Element in Akbar's 1\Jobility", P.I_._B.C., 36th Session, Aligarh 1975, JJ. 167.

- - - r -Abul Faf:l, Al\:bilr Nama, ed. Maulavi Abdur Ral)im, Bib. Ind., 3 vols;-calcutta, 1873-87, vol. I, pQ 342 (here­ina ft. r c i. ted as A. N. ) •

to very high positions. The author of the ZaUJ.irCJt-ul----.;: ___ . ---

.t.bm;ai?Jn mentions that some twenty-five persons of lmver 1

ranlcs were raised to the man~abs of :,ooo by B3iram Lhan.

Akbar himself st::1tes in a farman that Bairam Khan raised

several of his menial servants to the status of li_ban~:; and 2

SuJ. tans.

After the dismissal of Bairam Khan a crisis

developed at the court which led to the rebellion by most

of the Turani nobles. Akbar introduced two new elemer. ts -

Sl1aikhz8das (Indian Ivluslims) and Raj puts - as counter poise

to UJe pressure of Turani nobility. He also promoted Irani

nobles to l1igller ranks as a reward for their loyalty during ") _)

L.e crisis. It a !Joears t11a t the Iranian nobili t;y inlleri ted

by Akbar had already formed its nucleus in the court during

tl1e period of Humaylin 1 s stay in Iran and his restoration of

t.r1e Indian empire. In addition to this nucleus of Irani

nobles a large number of Persians migrated to India during

Akbar's reign in search of employment and were admitted to

1 Shaikh Farid Bhakkari, Zakbirat-ul Yhawanin, ed. s. Moinul Haq, 3 vols., KaracHi, 1961-l.Sr'?l+, vol. I,p. 17 (hereafter see ZoKh. ). ----

2 A._l~, Vol. II, pp. 106-107.

3 Iqtidar Alam Khan, 'The Nobility Under Akbar and the Development of his Religious Policy 1650-80 1 , J.E.A.s., Part 3-4, 1969, pp. 29-36 and his monograph, The Political Biograprq of a Mughal Noble Nunim Khan l\ban-i [.ba'):1an14 9'/-1~'/),_A_l i g a rh , -;,- 9 73; ·p-p-. XVI-XVI I.

the nobility. Several factors were responsible for tlJeir

migration from Ir~n. Apparently, the presence already of

un Irani element in higher positions and in subst::111tiul

5

nu.rubers. Togetber witl1 Akbar's conscious effort at dj_versi-

fying the ruling class, and his patronage of Persian nobles

an<i culture were obviously the principal factors H~1iCrJ

1 might have encour~ged them to come to India.

To this was added the persecution of Sunnis in the

$afavid empire during the sixteenth century when the choice·

left to several was either to accept Sbi•is~ or to forsake 2

- r -tLe country. During Akbar's reign Mir Abdul Lat,.if of

Qazwin came to India because of religious persecution in

Iran. Jle belonr;ed to the Saifi Saiyids of QaZ\vin \·Hjo Here

Stu111is by faith. On the testimony of Ghya~uddi.n J\li :As;af

KLan, Badalini states tlla t Saifi Saiyids 1.vere all bigoted

Stmnis and Shah f.'ahmasp deprived them of tneir estates, thus - r 3 _ _

compelling Mir Abdul Latif to come to India.. Sharif ,1muli,

1

2

3

See Afzal Husain's article op.cit. ,p. 168.

The people of Khawaf were former~y bigoted Suruiis but later they emerged as staunch Shi"as under the compu~sion during Shah ~bLas 1 s reign. See Zo!\11., Volo I, P5J. 195-96; see also Chapter 6 Section IIIo---

r - -- -- -Abdul ,QaQ.ir Bada Gni, Jviuntakb<:tb-ut Tawarihl;, ed. Haulavi A)1m:1d Ali, Bjh. Ind. ,5\TOis., Calcutta, 1868-69, Vol. III, pp. 97~Y9. .

a leader of Nuqtavi sect, is also said to have migrated 1

6

to Indi3 from Astarabad under similar circumstances. India

under Hkbar with its liberal (environment, provided a congenial

atmospliere to such fugitives. Eulogizing the reign of his

fa tl1c"'' Ja!1angir .has rightly observed that unlike other

countri::s, in the realm of his father peoples of different

sects and creeds Lad occupied a place. '1-/bile Sunni.s bad

no pl3ce in Ir~n and Shi~s in Tfir§n, but in his father's

realm Shi~s and Sunnis together prayed in a single mosque 2

just :Js "Cl1risti3ns and Jews" prayed together in one church.

The harsh policy of the ~afavids towards ~,eir

nobility was perlJUps anott1er major factor of tl:1e migration.

(- -After tne dee:1th of Sr1ab Ism::J.il ~afavi (1524 A.D.) family

feuds among princes and factional rivalries among nobles led

to uns tabili ty and anarchy in the empire which folmd it3

culmination in the establishment of a tradition of blood-3

tl1irs tiness in Persia. Observing this state of affairs

Lahori remarks, "In administering matters pertaining to

punishment, (His 1'1ajesty) does not make any distinction

1

2

3

_ r_ _ r -rs~andar Beg Turkman, Tari.l;W-i Alam Ara-i Abbasi 7 TehranJ ._.LO A.H.,Vol. II, p.470tl'ierelnaf''Ger c1ted as "A.A.A.). Tuz~~~i Jahangiri, ed. Syed Ahmad, Gbazi.pur anci. Ali£arh_, 18"b3-64, p. 16 CFiereinafter see TuzU!!_).

A. A. A., I, pp. Lt-~-46.

between the nobles and the common people. If per chance

the cruelty of t11e Turkish Sul ~ans, Qizilba.shes and Uzbeks,

and U1eir impudence in awarding punishments are mentioned

in His Majesty's preseree, His soul is so grieved that the 1

signs.of resentment are apparent from His lwninous forehead."

Ace or ding to Jvl. A tha r Ali durint; the 31 years Shah Abba.s I

executed no less than 48 prominent officers either on

suspicions or on religious grounds. In the Mugl1al empire,

as he r2rnarl{s, l,,,t alone such executions, even dismj_ssals,

wer2 very rare, and confiscation of nobles' property as 2

ptmislJinent was practically unknovm.

1

2

r --- - - -Abdul !J~Hri rl Lahori, Badshabnama, ed. Maulavis Kabiruddin J..i.JJu:,u: and Abdur Raplffi;"-:Bib---:-Tnd., 2 vols, Calcuttg ~ 186.7-68, Vol. I(a) pp. 139-4u[hereafter see L3boriJ. 'I' his passage has also been translated by 1"!. A tlmr Ali in his article "ToHards an Interpretation of the Hug11al Empire" in J.R.A.S. of Great Britain and Ireland, No. 1, 1978, Po 43-. -··---

- - r_ J.R.A.S., ££.cit., p. 44. The author of Tarikh-i Alrun-Ara-i ~bbasi, gives a detailed account of political crisis after Shah'Tahmasp's de8th and before the accession of Shah Isma'll .. II dealing Hi th the execution of leading nobles and assassin:,tion of Princes. See A.A. A., Vol. I, pp. 1 92-212. A bill Fa?l also writes tha "E during his reign of one and a half years Sha.h Ismail II killed his brothers, otlJer relatives and a large number of important nobles (A.Na, Vol. III, pp. 590-92). See also P.M. Sykes, A HIStOry of Persia, London, 191 5, Vol. II, p. 254, \J:here he · ives eight princes of the royal blood and seventeen leadinf nobles were put to death or bJ.inded by Shall Ism;{i.l II after his accession to the throne.

8

In o:.r-der to avoid punis.1ments and persecutions at the

1 onds of the court, a large number of leading nobles of the

~afovid empire micrated to Indiaa Some of them were intra-

duced in the hu.glla 1 court by their own relations who. 1rrere

- r - - -already in service. Jillwaja (lllya§uddin Ali Qazwini, bis _, -

nep11ew Ja 'afar Beg, son of Badiuzzaman, and the 1rrell kno-vm

Ei:r·za Q_bya§ Beg I' timad-ud Daula were prominent 9afavid

officjals wbo came to India during Akbar's reign under such 1

circwTistances. Kh5nlar ~u~fiqar Khan Qaramanlu also escaped

his life having re<3ched India tm.rards the close of Jal'""Janglr' s 2

reign.

Some of the Iranis carne to India under the groHing

pres~;ur·e of Uzbek invasions on the border provinces and the

~ufavid subjugation of l'lereditary chiefs under wl1om they were

serving in important positions a $adiq lv1ul)ammad tJ:lan of

Ler8 t bE: longed to such a family. His fa thE:r !vlul'_1ammad Baqir

was the wazir of Qa ra Kba.n 'I'urkman, tl""Je ruler of Khur'5 san

VJhen Qara g1an rebeLLed against Shal1 ~'abmasp and was expelled,

Baqir tJ:an fled from Herat and joined the service of Bairam

1 For details see Afzal Husain's article QE_.cit., pp. 170-71.

2 Lahori, I (a), p. 73.

g-

1 Ltun along 1-.ri t.h his son ?adiq l-1ul}ammad Khan. Qasin~ KuJ::mmmad

Khan a prominent officj_al of N:is.hapilr bad to forsate .his

co1.mtry under tbe pressure of Uzbek invosion of Nishapfu, 2

and he too joined Bairam Khan's service. TarsUn. Hubammad

I·~b;:in on being expelled from Gbarj is tan by Sbab ~:ahma.sp in

1:-34 fled to India and joined first Bairam Kba.n in Qandabar 3 -

;:-;nd after his overthrow joined Akbar. Ja 1 afar !Sban Tal<.:lu ,

son of· Qazzaq D:ian the governor of Herat, 1vas al:.~o a vic tin:

of this kind. After bis father's imprisonment by Sha.h

~abmasp in 156S .Ja 'afar _1!}an4

escaped to India vJher-e he was

favourably received by Akbar. Similcrly, ~akim Abru Fat0

GilCni, son of Abdur Razzaq the ~ of Giliin, fled to

India along with his two brothers Hakim Hummam and Haldm

lJurucldin after the imprisonment of AJ:lma.d £d:lan the ruler of

- -Gil an ur1der wbom their fa tbl:r was serving. In In eli a. tiley

5 were given employment by Akbar in 1S76. The two i;)afavid

broUJers, 1-:irza }11J?.affar !j.usain and Hirza Rustam, great - r_

grandsons of Sbab Ismail i;)afavi,also migrated to India towards

U;.c close of Akbar's reign (See Chapter 6, Section V)o

1 Shahnawaz Khan, Jv:SJ. 1asir-uJ.. Urnara·, ed. l'1aulavis Abdur Ra~Im and Mirzff Ashrar ~Ii, Bib. Ind., 3 vols,, Calcutta 1 Lc,8-91 , Vol. II , pp. 724-29---ri18rea r ter cited as M. U. ) •

2 Ibid •• --'

Vol. III, pp. 50-~2.

3 Ib~d., Vol. I, pp. 471 -?7.

4 Ibi~, Vol. I, pp. 507-509.

Ibid •• --' PPo 7 ~~s-: 62.

10

In addition to these specific types of immicrants,

a lc:rge number of Iranis carne to India during t11e reigns of

Al~bar and Jah'?:nu;Ir as adventurers in search of better

onfJortuni tj es knowing tba t tY1e lv1u!Q1al court was open to

talented people, where by merit they might be able to

acbicve distinct positions and high man§abs in the Central

Government.

~~hatever migl1t have been the cause of a particular

person miGra tin£~ from Ir~n, his previous s t:j tus and

experience in Iran played an important part in the TanL

and office assigned to him in the Mughal Empire. Only those

l·.'ho bad requisite experience and qualifications were taken

into service. In this sense the ~afavid empire seems to

llave provided a training, ground for the Nughal bureaucracy.

Tl1ere is, therefore, some truth, along with hyperbole in

w11at Chandra Bha.n Brahman wr:L tes:

II And since this (Jvlui.Qlal) empire was a. place

w11ere the wishes v1ere fulfilled a large number of

men of sword and pen, the people of excellence and

qLality, leaTned scholars and poets, skilled artisans

and other skilful persons from the cities of the

wo:'ld like Is tambol, Aleppo, Egypt, Syr:La, Ba-?rah,

Baghdad, Ramadan, Shirwan, Sur.oakhi, Gilan, r-'Iazandran,

I - - -Astra oad, Gt.mj all, Burda, Tabriz, Ardabil, Qa zvlin,

Qum, sa1va11, Kasban, Tebran, Yazd, I9fa.han, s:oi1·az,

11

Kirmfm, Samnan, Dam~an, Bustam, Sabzwar, Nlshapfu,

Harv, Mashhad, Tus, Tis, QaJ..n, TUn., Isfrain, Jam,

Hera t, Kllawa f, Ba!Qlarz, Sis tan, Farah, Qandahar,

Balkh, Badatbshan, Buk_bara, Samarqand, Andijan,

Tibbet, Kasbghar, and countries of Turkistan and

various kinds of people of other countries came to

this great empire with great expectations and anti-

cipations. They entered into the service of this

bountiful kingdom which was an asylum for the people 1

of the world. 11

There is ample evidence to show that persons of

professional and bureaucratic skills were always in demand 2

at t:he Mughal court.

1 Guldasta, op.cit., ff. 5(a) - 6(b).

2 Fatl)ullah Shirazi, the famous sc!}olar and scientist, first came to the Deccan from Shiraz at the invitation of the Adil Shah of Bijapfu. Later Akbar invited him to_his_court. (A.N. ,III, p. 391 ). Mulla Shukrullah Shirazi, a learneaman of Shiraz intended to migrate to the Deccan and reached Surat. There he was enter­tained by Abdur Ral)im Khan-i Khanan who himself v1as a good scholar and patron of learning. He took the Hulla into his service. Later on MulHi: Shukrullah v1as appointed Ar~-i Mukarrar by Jananglr (Lahori, I(a), pp. 257-58; I(b), Po 339; Cf. Z.Y.n., II, p. 255 where h;!.s name is wrongly mentioned as Mulla Abdul Shakur). Mir lvluJ:mmmad Amin, Mir Jumla Shahristanl was wa.zir of Golkunda ~der Hul)arnmad Quli Qutb Shah. V..'ben the Qut;b Shah died Nir Jumla returned to Isfanan. Where he was ill-treated by Shah Abbas I. Eventually, in a letter to Jahangir he expressed his e~rnest desire of joining the Mughal servi~e. Jahangir thereupon invited him and appointed him 1•lir-i Saman (Lahori, I(a), p. 258; I(b), p. 279).

During the reign of Jahangir Iran:Is are found to

have improved their position both in number and mansabs. 1

l.G

On the basis of M. Athar Ali's lists I have compiled my

own tables which bave been appended at the end of this

chapter. The man~abd5rs of Jah~ngir•s reign have been

divided into two phases -viz. (a) from 1605 to 1616 and

(b) from 1617 to 1627. Each phase contains two tables one

showing the numerical strength of different racial groups

and the other tbeir mam;abs in the aggregate. Man§?-bdars

holding the rank of 1000 ~at and above, who were alive till

the termination point of each phase have been taken into

account. Secondly, only the highest ranks acquired by the

manya~@rs by the end of each phase bave been calculated,

the preceding 10\·Jer ranks being dropped. In Akbar 1 s nobility

druing 1 575-1 595 out of 87 total mansabd~rs of 1 000 ~

and above, there were 24 I ranis (27. 58%), 32 Turanis ( 36.78%),

14 Indian Muslims (16.0~S), 14 Rajputs and Hindus (16.09/0, 2

and 3 persons with origin not traceable (3.44%). Dur:ing the

first phase of Jah~ngir•s reign (1605-1616) out of 131 total

mansa~dars of 1000 ~at and above the Iranis numbered 38(29%)

Turanis 35 (26.7;0, Indian Muslims 15 (11.4%), Rajputs 25(19%)

1 The -~_E_ara ~~~C?..:C_~mpire -::_ Aw~ds of_l{_anl{S, Offices and Titles to the Nughal Nobility IT574-1 b"58)' o. u~?-:-,Deihi' 198);- pp;-"ltr-=-9lrrhereafter see Appa~§_~us).

2 See Iqtidar Alarn K.ban' s article op. c~ t., p. 35.

13

and unidentified 6(4. 5% ). This shovls tl1at uncler Jabanglr

the number of Turanls declined from 36. 7% to 26. '?}s, while

!ranis increased marginally from 27.5%, to 29%. During

the second phase of Jahanglr 1 s reign (1617-1627) !ranis

further improved their position as they numbered 48 out of

14 3 total number of man~~bdar~ of 1 000 ~a.!_ and above, thus

accounting for 33.5% of the total nobility. The Tiiranis,

receded further, numbering only 27 or 18.8% of the total.

A similar picture emerges from a study of the total

man~a~~ held by the various racial groups. The man$ab

statistics for 1605 (at the death of Akbar) have been 1

compiled by Afzal Husain and for the two phases of Jahangir•s 2

reign by me. Afzal Husain has included man$abdars of 500 ;;;;at

and above while I have confined myself to mansabdars _9f

1000 ~at and above. Thus it appears that at the death of

Akbar out of total knm·m man$abs of 1 ,87,000 ~a_! and 58_, 950

sawur, Turanls held 76,800 gat and 19 ,l+OO sawar, resoec ti vely

41% and 43.7% of the total. The !ranis held 34,200 ~at and

11 , 700 sawar or 18% and 26~{; of the total. It also appears

that the share of !ranis in the total ranks during the later

years of Akbar's reign was even lower than that of the Rajputs

who held 41,200 ~at (22%) and 14,650 sawar (33%). Indian

I-·Iuslims held just 7;0 of the total (~at) rank. Commenting on

1 "The Position of Racial Groups In tbe Jvlughal Nobility 1605-1613", in U .. P.Historical RevievJ, Vol.2,No.1 ,1983, Table-B, p. 23.

2 See Appendix B Tables 1-2.

14

his tables Afzal Husain says that the Iranls tended to be

more numerous in minor ranks, whereas out of 32 Turani

nobles, 28 nobles held ranks of 1000 ~at and above and among - 1

those six held ranks of 5000 ~at and above.

However, a significant change occurs during the

reign of Jahangir. By the end of the first phase (1616)

out of total ranks of 3,56,900 ~at and 2,07,330 sa\,ra~, the

Iranis held 1 ,09,700 ~at and 68,200 sawar, respectively

30. ?}s and 32.8% of the total. The Turan:Is held 91+,000 g;at

and 47,130 sa1,rar or 26.3% and 22. ?/a of the total. Thus

t~ne Turanls 1 share in the total ranks sharply declined,

wl1ile that of the IrEmls rose dramatically and nmv exceeded

tbat of the Turanis. The Rajputs also lost considerably,

since they now held 19.3% of gat and 17.1% of sawar ranks

while Indian }'luslims gained an increase from just 7!~ of the

total g;at during Akbar's later years to 13.1% of #at and

1 6. 9% of saviar of the total ranks in 1616. In contrast to

Akbar's time Jahang:Ir•s reign saw a pre-eminence of the

Iranis in the highest ranks. Out of 38 Iranis of 1000 zat ---and above at least nine belonged to the category of 5000

~at and above while there were seven Turanis in the same

1 See Afzal Bus:Jin's article in U.P.B.Ro, op.cit., p. 24.

15

category. In the second phase the number of Turanis in

that category declined to five, while that of the Iranis

increased to eleven.

By the close of Jahangir's reign the Iranls are

thus found to have considerably exceeded the Turanis both

in numerical strength within the nobility, as well as in

terms of man§abs held. Out of total ranks of 3,45,900 ~at

and 2,41,480 sawar, the Iranfs held 1 728,000 ~at (37%) and

1,08 7 000 sawar (44.?%) while Turanis held 67,000 ~at (19.3%)

and 44,050 sawar ra.nl{S ( 18. 2'fo).

An analysis of racial composition of central

ministers and provincial governors is also of some interest.

The statisticsfor the same have been taken from Afzal Husain's 1 2

papers and M. Athar Ali's lists.

1 For Central Ministers see "The Position of Racial Groups in the Mughal Nobility" in U. P .H .R. , op. cit. , p. 26; and for governors see "Provincial Governors Under Akbar (1~80-1605)", in P.I.H.C., 32nd Session, Jabalpur, 1970, pp. 269-277.

2 Appa_I~tus, op.cit. Tables 1-2,4-5, pp. xxvii-xxiX, xxxii-xxxvi.

16

Central Ministers Under Akbar ----·-·---- -~

Office I ranis Turanis Ind.Huslims Rajpu.ts Un- Total speci fie d.

i·Jah.il 2 5 7

Wazir/ 7 2 1 10 Diw§n

gir Bahl;lshi 8 3 2 2 15"

§adr-us-2_udur 2 1 1 4

Central Ministers Under Jahangir

Office I ranis Indian Huslims Total

Wakil 4 4

~Jazir/Diwa~ 4 1 5 -Nir Balillshi t:;

/ 1 1 7 -Mir sam an 3 3

§adr-us-~udur 1 3 2

··---

17

Prov:Lncial Governors Under Akb2r And Jnb~mgir ---------·-----------~_:...:..~__.;;;...~;;;.._..~--.;;..._~~

Period 'l'otal No. of Appoint-

Iranis Tliranis Afghans Ind. Rajputs ~us- &

Unspe­cified

Akbar

1 ~80-1605.

Jahangir

160~-1627.

ments.

49

61

16 17

23 15

li-ms Hindus.

1 6 7 2

3 3 1

It is infered from these tables that r\kbu.r dre1>1 his

ministers from almost all sections of the nobility. Iranis,

Turanis, Indian ~~1uslims and Hindus. Except for the office of

wal\:il, W;;ere out of seven incumbents only two were Ir~nis

and ren,::lining five were 'l'uranis, in other central offices

tlle lranis are fairly wel] represented under Akbur. Under

Jahong::Ir hm.rever, the complexion changes entirely in tbeir

favour: All his four wakjls were Iranis, so were all his

four diwa!.l~, except for Jan Beg hazir-tll :t-·Iul.k (a T-Lir5ni) vlho

"~eld t11e office jointly for barely one yeD r at the beginning

- -of the reign. As regards the lv1ir Bakhshis, with the exception ----=--- -of Slni}ib Farid Bukb3ri (Indian huslim) ,and J·an Beg ',-.razir-ul

Kulk (Tur3n:i), who l1eld the office for very short periods,

18

all his Mir Bakhsl"ds were Ira.nis, and so were all his

Nir Samans. Tr1e office of §adr-us $udur, was a sen1i­

tl1eological office, and so Sunnis were preferred. Here

alone were the Iranis, being Shias, sparingly appointed.

Under Akbar two Iranis held office as $adrs for about nine

years; under bis son only one Irani held this office 1

curing the last tl1ree years of Jahangir's reign. Except

for the office of §adr, then, the Irani's tended to

monopolise central offices. This trend appears to have 2

continued during the reigns of Shahjahan and Aurangzeb.

During Akbar's reign (for only a part of his reign

1 SB0-1605) all the four major racial groups supplied

provincial governors in a fairly bale.nced manner. 'rbe

I ranis appear to have been treated at par vli th 'l'uranis, and

tbe Rajp1Its witb Indian .Husli~s. Out of 49 total incumbents

(exclLding Princes) known to have been appointed as

governors of various subas, the Iranis numbered 16 and

Tiir~nis 17, Indian Muslims six, and R~jp~ts seven. But

during Jah~wgir 1 s reign botb Ir~mis and Indian Huslims

appear to bave cornered most appointments. Our table sbows

, ________ _ 1 Also see Appara~us, p. x:xii.

2 Sec Chapter 5·

19

that out of 61 persons (excluding princes) kno""Vm to bave

been appointed governors of various provinces 23 were

Ir2mis :tgainst 12 'l'uranis and 13 Indian Huslims, \vhile

the number of Rajputs fell to three.

These inferences are also borne out by contemporary 1

records. They sur:€~es t that Jahangir extended special

favours to Iranls and Indian Muslims while the Turanls and

Raj puts felt they were being throvm into the backgrormd.

bilJiam Hc-nvkins ( 1 609-11 ) and Ni'ma tul1ah ( 1 614) also draw 2

sLn~il31· conclm;ions at least in respect of the Rajputs.

The :cise of the Iranis during the reign of Jahangir is

attributable to his policy of not placing absolute reliance

on tlJe old (Akbar Shahi) nobility parti_cularly when Khu.:_;rau

h3d rebelled soon after his accession. He strove to

promote a new (Jahangir Shahl) nobility in whom he could

lwve complete confidence to counter the old nobility.

1 tlirza 1

Aziz Koka • s petition in Ar~dasht-ha-i MU£taff'ar, Eol'~o l•1S. Add. 16859, ff. 19a-b. In his 'art;;dasfit-(pe-ti­tion) to Jahangl.r, dated 1613, JVIirza 'Aziz Koka v1r:Ltes: "His Naj es ty Akbar, during the fifty years of his reign, incre,___,sed the number of Chaghatais (Turanls) and Raj puts for these people are not seditious. (But) Your lvlajesty has destroyed both tbese groups and have entrusted your entire business to Kbura_sanis (I ranis) and ShaijJ1zadas (Indian Muslims) vll1o know nothing except l1ypocrisy and sedition." See also Anonymous (probably Pelsaert), A Con temporary Dutch Chronicle of Ivrugbal India., tr. Brl"j Narain and S.R. Sharma, Calcutta, 1957, pp. 92-3.

2 Early Travels in India (1583-1619), ed. H. Foste;r, Lo£ldon, 1227, pp. ·1 06-107; Tari@-i _Khan Jahan~_, ed. S.M. Imam Al-Din, Decca, 1960, Vol. II, pp. 497-98.

2{)

Ja:nangir appears to have recruited to higher ranks his

personal servants, family friends and those who stood

VIi th him at crucial moments of his career. A fevl nobles

were,however, raised to higher ranks on political consi-

d8rotions. Some of the Akbari nobles, who sided Hith him

at the time of the accession crisis, v1ere also promoted;

though tlleir promotions were rather modest. Jah5ngi.r•s

own remarks. made at the time of promoting these nobles

clearly indicate that substantial promotions were given

r.rj_mo rily on the bas is of personal loyalty. To this n~ay

(' -be related his reliance upon the family of I timadud-D Jula

and l\ur Jahan, on whose members he conferred high ranl-cs

and offices. There is hardly any reference to suggest that

favours were shovm to a particular noble on the basj_s of

bis racial st2tus or that the Emperor was sympathetic 1

to1:1ards a particular group of nobles.

It may be noted that after his accession Ja:l'1angir

retained most of the old Akbari nobles in his service and

restored tlleir previous positions. In the eleventh article

of his twelve regulations issued after his accession he

decls res, "I gave a general order tba t the ran1\: and j 8 gir

1 See Afzal Husain's article 'Elements of Continuity and Stability in the Mughal Nobility Under Akbar and Jabangir ', in Stu.dies in History, Vol. II, Noo 2, July-Decetuber, 1980, pp. 30-31. --

21

held by my father 1 s servants will remain unchanged. 11 Else-

r..1bere he adds, "I left all those who were in possession of

posts both inside and outside in the position wl1ich they 1

had with my father.'l Yet in practice the older nobility r -

wos divested of much of its influence. Although Mirza Aziz

Koka and Man Singh Here retained in service, they lost the

unique position ,,,bich they had enjoyed under Akbar. Thus

,,,l1en the rapid promotions vrere given to certain nobles or

the families of nobles (mainly Iranis and Shaikhzadas) the

resentment among the old nobility v1as inevitable. Hence

the al1egation ofAziz Koka regarding Jahangir•s attitude

touards the four leading racial groups. After a close t" - ('

scrutiny of Aziz Koka 1 s ar~dasht in tbe light of the events

sur:counding the accession of Jahangi.r, Afzal Husain arrives r -

a.t the conclusion that Aziz Koka 1 s complaint was actually

directed against tbe Emperor's apathy tovrards the old Akbari

nobles and undue favours shm·m to a particular group of

nobles (which included some Turanis as vlell as Raj puts).

(' - -According to him when Aziz Koka states that Tfrranis and

R~jp~ts were destroyed, he apparently bas in mind the r -

isolation of the Atkas (to wbich Aziz Koka belonged) and

the House of Amber (to which Han Singh belonged). Similarly

1 Tuzuk, pp. 4-5, 7. . '· '

THESIS 954.025

K5274 lr

lllllllllllllllllllllllll Tll~"!!~"\

\

1 '. • ~,- . ' I . . \ ~ ' , ~ L ) . ..._ -

.. ,, - . ,,

771- 5s53

'i.vhen he alleges tba t the Emperor had entrusted hi.s entire

business in the tJC:mds of Kl1urasanls (Ir'Einis) and Shaikh-

zadas he seems to have had in his mind family of I I tima.d-

ucl Luul3 Hhich had become very povierful immedi3tely after 1

tl!e n18rriage of h ilr Jahan vli th Jahangir. J.s well as members 2

of Salln1 Chishti' s family to which Jahangi.r was particular-3

ly <JttCJclK:d owing to the circumstances of his mm birth.

1 Irfan Eabib, 'The Family of Nur Jah3n During Jabjngir 1 s Eeign - A Political Study 1 , Hedicval India-A ~iscellan.z, Vol. I, 1969, pp. 74-95.

2 See Afzal Husain, 1 The Family of Shaikh Salim C l1isL ti During the Reign of Jabangir 1 , Medieval India - A Jviiscellany, Vol. II, pp. 61-69.

3 Afzal husain 1 s article in U.P.H.R., Op.cit., p. 28.

APPENDIX-A

Nu:ner ical Composition of Racial Groups under Jahanqir

Table 1 First Phase (1605-1616)

·---Category Iran is Turanis Afgbans Indian Other Raj puts Hindus Unidentified Total

) . ~'iuslirns I1uslims

A 5000-7000 zat 9 7 1 4 4 1 1 27

vi 33.3 25.9 3.7 14.8 14.8 3.7 3.7 /0

·-B

3000-4500 ~at 7 4 4 8 23

~~ 30.4 17.3 17.3 34.7

c 1000-2500 zat 22 24 7 7 2 13 1 5 81

~/ 2 7.1 29.6 8.6 8.6 2.4 16.0 1.2 6.1 /0

-->tal 38 35 8 15 2 25 2 6 131

!rcentage 29.0 2 6. 7 6.1 11.4 1.5 19.0 1.5 4.5 100 ~..,.._

Table 2 §.££ond Phase (1617-1627~

-s .No. Category Iran is TUranis Afg.!)ans Indian Raj puts !viarathas Hindus Unidentified Tote: Muslims

-- ·-- --1 • A

5000-7()00 zat 11 5 1 2 5 24

% 45.8 20.8 4.1 • 8.3 20.8

2. B 3000-4500 zat 8 4 2 3 3 1 21

·I i~ 38.0 19.0 9.5 14. 2 14.2 4.7

3. c l000-2500 zat 29 18 10 16 17 1 7 98

% 29.5 18.3 10.2 16.3 17.3 1.0 7.1

Total 48 27 13 21 25 1 1. 7 143

Percentage 33.5 18.8 9.0 14.6 17.4 0.7 0.7 4.8 100 --

'

25

~~

Mansabs Held by Different Racial Groups under Jah1mglr

Table 1 : First Phase (1605-1616}

Category

(a) l-1ansabdars of 5ooo·zat & above ---

7000x3

6000x4

7000/5000

6000/3000

14000/x

12000/10000

Indian Muslims

6000/12000

5ooox2o 35ooo/32ooo 15000/1oooo 5000/5ooo 15000/9ooo

Total

(b) r-1ansabdars

of 3000 to 4000 zat ---

2 7 48000/40000

% 33.10/38.35

4000x11

3500x3

3000X9

20000/13900

3500/2500

3000/2000

41000/20000 5000/5000 21000/21000

28.27/19.17 3.44/4.79 14.48/20.13

8000/3500

6000/3000

4000/2000

3500/2200

6000/4300

Total 23 26500/18400 14000/6500

% 32.51/39.31 17.17/13.88

13500/8500

16.5 6/18.16

(c) Hansabdars 2500x08 5000/2000 of 1000 to below2ooox27 12000/2950 3000 zat

--- 1800x01 1800/ -

Total

- - - -

1 700x01

1500x17 9000/1450

1400x01 1400/800

1000x26 6000/2600

81 35200/9800

'Yo 26.99/17.42 ------ -

7500/3500 2500/1000

16000/8150 2000/1000 6000/2700

7500/4000 4500/1700 3000/1700

8000/4980 3000/3000 1000/300

39000/20630 9500/5700 12500/5700

29.90/36.68 7.28/10.13 9.58/10.13 ------ - - - - - - - - - - - -

Other MUslin--s

Raj puts Hindus Unidentified Total

21000/ 5000

24000/25000

20000/11300 5000/5000 5000/2000 100000/74300

20000/11300 5000/5000 5000/2000 145000/104300 13.79/10.83 3.44/4.79 3.44/1.91 100

12000/9900

3500/2000

12000/1500

27500/13400 -

33.74/28.63

44000/29300

10500/6700

27000/10800

81500/46800

100

5000/2400 .

4000/1000 10000/5700

20000/8900

4000/1200 54000/22700

1700/1000

1500/-

5000/2700

4000/1000 21500/10800 1700/1000

3,06/1.77 16.48/19.20 1.30/1.77 - - - - - ------ - - - - - -

1800/ -

1700/1000

25500/8850

1400/ 800

3000/400 26000/13980

7000/1600 130400/56230

5.36/2.84 100 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

•rotal (a+b+c) 131 109700/68200 94000/47130 11500/10700 47000/35200 4000/1000 69000/35500 6700 /6000 12000/3600 356900/207330

Yo 30.73/32.89 26.33/22.73 4.06/5.16 13.16/16.97 1.12/0.48 19,33/17.12 1,87/2.89 3.36/1.73 100

l\lan~abs Held by Different Rac~al Groups Under Jahangir

.Talli2 Second Phase (1617-1627)

Category IRAN IS TURANIS AFQj-lAl'!S INDIAN MUS- RAJPUTS HINDUS

----------~----------------------~------------------~~s~ (a) Maosabdars of 5ooo·zat & above -.-

Total

(b) I··iansabdars of 3000'to 4ooo ~a.:!:

Total

(c) Z'-:ansabdars of 1000'to be low 3000 ~at

Total

700Cx2

6000x1

14000/21000

5ooox21 45000/465oo 25ooo/21ooo

- - - - - - - ------24 59000/67500 25000/21000

'}. 47.2/53.35 20/16.60

- - - - - - - ------4000x11 - 16000/15000 8000/5500

3000xlO 12000/6400 6000/3000

- - - - - - - - - - - - -21 28000/21400 14000/8500

c' /0 37.83/55.01 18.91/21.85

- - - - - - - - - - - - -2500x6- 2500/1000 5000/3000

2000x29 12000/6100 12000/5100

1500x21 13500/7100 3000/2700

1200x2 1200/450

1000x40 13000/4900 7000/3300 ------ - - - -- - - -

98 41000/19100 28200/14550

,, {0 27.91/25.10 19.19/19.12

-

-

-

6000/6000

- - - -6000/6000

4.8/4.74

10000/10000 25000/ 22000

------10000/10000

8/7.90

25000/ 22000

20/17.39

- - - - - - - - -4000/- 4000/2500 .

3000/2000 6oocy-

- - - -·- - - - -7000/2000 10000/2500

-

12000/ 3000.

- - -12000/ 3000

9.45/5.14<, 13.51/6.4 2 16.21/7.71

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -5000/3400 4500/1500

6000/4000 8000/5700. 20000/11300 -

1500/1200 4500/2900 7500/3900 -

4000/1500 8000/4000 2000/500 1000/1200 - - - - - ------ - - - - -16500/10100 23000/14100 29500/

15700

11.23/13.27 15.65/18.53 20.08/ 20.63

------1000/1200

0. 6A/1. 57

MARATHAS

3000/1500

3000/1500

4.05/3.85

-- - -

- - - -

26

UNIDENTIFIED TOTAL

- - - -

1500/ -

1200/300

5000/1030 ------

7700/1330

5.24/1.74

14000/21000

6000/6000

105000/99500

125000/126500

100

44000/26000

30000/12900

74000/38900

100

- -15000/8900

58000/32200

31500/17800

2400/750

40000/16430 ------14 6900/76080

100

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -A- -

-

--

Tota 1 (a+bt-c) 143 128000/108000 67000/44050 29000/18100 43000/26600 66500/ 1000/1200 3000/1500 7700/1330 345900/241480 40700

37.00/~4.72 19.36/18.24 8.38/7.49 12.43/11.01 19.22/ 0.28/ 0.49 0.86/0.62 2.22/0.55 100 16.85